@avidamoeba@lemmy.ca
@avidamoeba@lemmy.ca avatar

avidamoeba

@avidamoeba@lemmy.ca

This profile is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.

avidamoeba, (edited )
@avidamoeba@lemmy.ca avatar

Whenever you get bored:


<span style="color:#323232;">~$ sudo docker run -it --rm archlinux bash
</span><span style="color:#323232;">[root@5452124778b3 /]# pacman -Syu
</span><span style="color:#323232;">:: Synchronizing package databases...
</span><span style="color:#323232;"> core downloading...
</span><span style="color:#323232;"> extra downloading...
</span><span style="color:#323232;">:: Starting full system upgrade...
</span><span style="color:#323232;">resolving dependencies...
</span>
avidamoeba,
@avidamoeba@lemmy.ca avatar

I like snaps.

avidamoeba,
@avidamoeba@lemmy.ca avatar

Yup. It’s bullshit. They just don’t include Flatpak in the default OS from the installation media.

avidamoeba, (edited )
@avidamoeba@lemmy.ca avatar

I like this comment.

avidamoeba, (edited )
@avidamoeba@lemmy.ca avatar

I think they’re a good way to package apps. Superior to Flatpak for sure. I like Flatpak too and if Canonical abandoned Snap tomorrow, I’d switch my snap-packaged apps to Flatpak. The only non-bullshit downside of Snap is the proprietary server-side and the lack of multi-repo support. I don’t care much about either because I know implementing either is fairly uncomplicated and it will happen should the reason arise. If Debian wanted to start using Snap, it’d take them a month to get the basics working with their own server side. If the client side was proprietary too, I’d have had a completely opposite opinion on Snap. Finally Canonical supplies all the software on my OS. I use third party repos only when absolutely necessary. If Canonical ran a proprietary apt server side, I wouldn’t even know, apt doesn’t care. Some of the myriad HTTP mirrors could easily be running on IIS, or S3, or Nexus. The trust equation for snap is equivalent.

avidamoeba, (edited )
@avidamoeba@lemmy.ca avatar

Because you can package and deploy OS components with it. As a result you can build an OS with it, do foolproof updates of it and …gulp, happy tear… rollback components without involving any other system like a special filesystem.

My bravery comes from being a software guy that’s been doing OS software development for over a decade so I believe my opinion is somewhat informed. 😂 I’m currently working on a software updates implementation for an automotive OS.

avidamoeba, (edited )
@avidamoeba@lemmy.ca avatar

Answered under the sibling comment: lemmy.ca/comment/4954544

Ubuntu 24.04 LTS Committing Fully To Netplan For Network Configuration (www.phoronix.com)

The Canonical-developed Netplan has served for Linux network configuration on Ubuntu Server and Cloud versions for years. With the recent Ubuntu 23.10 release, Netplan is now being used by default on the desktop. Canonical is committing to fully leveraging Netplan for network configuration with the upcoming Ubuntu 24.04 LTS...

avidamoeba, (edited )
@avidamoeba@lemmy.ca avatar

Can it suck more than NetworkManager? 🥹

avidamoeba,
@avidamoeba@lemmy.ca avatar

JFC, this misinformation again…

avidamoeba,
@avidamoeba@lemmy.ca avatar

Isn’t Fedora’s support window a bit over a year per release? Would you want to deal with upgrades every year?

avidamoeba,
@avidamoeba@lemmy.ca avatar

We won’t stop using the market till it starts working.

avidamoeba,
@avidamoeba@lemmy.ca avatar

Requires login. Any word on when it’s making in stable?

avidamoeba,
@avidamoeba@lemmy.ca avatar

If you reinstall often a separate /home makes some sense. Otherwise it’s probably pointless. I’d try to get to a point where I don’t have to reinstall my base OS and invest in an automatic backup solution.

avidamoeba, (edited )
@avidamoeba@lemmy.ca avatar

Flatpak cannot do what’s discussed in the article. Snap can and it was started prior to Flatpak. If Flatpak was able to do what Snap can, you’d have half a point.

avidamoeba,
@avidamoeba@lemmy.ca avatar

I’m pretty excited about it. It’s a much cleaner solution to the problem immutable OSes are trying to solve. Dare I say it’s better even than the Android model because it covers the whole stack with a single system.

avidamoeba,
@avidamoeba@lemmy.ca avatar

Unlike desktop environments where there were equivalent alternatives to Unity, Flatpak isn’t an alternative to Snap that can deliver an equivalent solution. You can’t build an OS on top of Flatpak. This is why I think that if Snap makes the lives of Canonical developers easier, they’ll keep maintaining it. We’ll know if Ubuntu Core Desktop becomes a mainstream flavor or the default one. I think there is a commercial value of it in the enterprise world where tight control of the OS and upgrade robustness are needed. In this kind of a future Snap will have a long and productive life. If it ends up being used only for desktop apps which Flatpak covers, it may fall by the wayside as you suggested.

avidamoeba,
@avidamoeba@lemmy.ca avatar

Ubuntu btw

avidamoeba, (edited )
@avidamoeba@lemmy.ca avatar

Tried it, wow, it did indeed vomit in my face.

avidamoeba,
@avidamoeba@lemmy.ca avatar

Based on what I saw on macOS I wouldn’t touch Homebrew with a 10 feet pole. We have proper packaging systems in the Linux world. The Chromium snap is supported by Canonical so that’s a great candidate for anything that comes with snap or can use snap. If I couldn’t use snap, I’d use the Chromium flatpak from Flathub.

avidamoeba,
@avidamoeba@lemmy.ca avatar

Are Chromium browsers affected by this too?

avidamoeba,
@avidamoeba@lemmy.ca avatar

Signed,

Windows users

avidamoeba,
@avidamoeba@lemmy.ca avatar

The ugly truth.

avidamoeba,
@avidamoeba@lemmy.ca avatar

The academic truth.

  • All
  • Subscribed
  • Moderated
  • Favorites
  • •
  • localhost
  • All magazines
    •
    Loading…
    Loading the web debug toolbar…
    Attempt #